fredag, april 21, 2006

Obadiahslope wrote: ”The critical area of difference IMHO is the doctrine of revelation and the place of scripture.”

Now, these are Indo-European concepts, not Biblical ones. They come from the anti-Cosmic Hellenistic Philosophy of old Alex. Cosmos is created by the Demiourgos, the Soul/sperm of man (women don’t have sperm and consequently no souls) is im-prisoned in the Dust of the Vale of Tears.

Real reality is somewhere else; in the World of Ideas.

“Revelation/Salvation” of this “truth” (which is Absolute Truth!) is either direct or by a Holy Scripture in the singular, singularly fallen from the skies.

This explains how Nigerian Archbishop Akinola can say to Peter Boyer ofThe New Yorker that he “knows” the “mind” of God. The small “nous” of man has direct access to the big Nous of The Highest Being, through “revelation”.

The idea of a "sufficient" and "harmonic" Scripture in the singular, being in it self “revelation” and leading to “salvation” is not how the Church sees her holy scriptures in the plural.

To the Church, the holy scriptures are not “revelation/salvation”, but witnesses. They witness to the good Works of the Holy Spirit in God’s good Creation, in the Lives of humans and in the Congre-gation.

Further, to a Lutheran tradition, “the Word of God” is the spoken word; preaching, not the print. The same goes for Hebrew and Arabic; kitav/b being the word written, Koran referring to the real thing; the spoken word; the address.

The 1593 Church of Sweden Confessio fídei says in its 1st article, that it’s the “writs of the holy Prophets, the holy Evangelists and the holy Apostles”, that are God’s word written. This is a rebuttal of the Calvinist formula “the Prophets and the Apostles” (anta-gonistically) referring to (a shortened) OT and NT.

Other scriptures are not in themselves “canonical”, leaving both the Books of Mose (not being written by Moses, who is not a Prophet) and the late OT Hellenistic deutero-canonical scriptures – “apocrypha” to Calvinism (we put these together in a section of their own between the OT and NT) – and the 2nd century NT deutero-canonical scriptures into social disciplining – "canonical" to Calvinism – in a middle ground, where they are appreciated for their merits, not for their Errors (subordination of women and slaves, and so on).

To which one must add the Indo-European concepts of “law” and “works”. “Law” in our Bibles is a corruption of Tradition. Judaism never was about law. Only Calvinism is legalistic.

Calvinism continues the anti-cosmic Indo-European Academic teachings of a Salvation from the Prison of the Spirit in the Dust of the Vale of Tears of the Demiourgos, to The Highest Being through Merit achieved by Works of Law.

Karma and Mocksha.

Lutheranism rejects both the Works of Rome and Calvinism. Only that which is necessary for Salvation is necessary for Salvation! If anything not necessary is claimed to be, it must be rejected flatly!

To the Bible Creation is God’s good work – and only the works of God are Good works. The Bible witnesses to the good works of God – and is to be read, loved and cherished.

onsdag, april 12, 2006

The word nómos may very well mean “law” in Academic Greek, the artificial Greek of Platonizing Academies – what do I know? But in the theological/technical lingo of the Septuagint and the NT, it doesn’t. It means “Tradition”.

Something that is passed on; given.

The same root occurs in kläronómo; to take ones lot in the Kingdom, to share, being part (for instance in 1 Cor 6.9-11).

Which is not about “inheritance” in a Canon law sense, because “property” did not exist before the “natural” (= idealistic, that is un-natural) legal theories of the 13th century.

The Inheritance belonged eschatologically to the House/Family/ Clan – that is over Time. Not individually to the person (who wasn’t defined as an “individual” before Modernity). Thence “lot”. It’s temporary.

And then we give away to the next generation. Tradition.

“Fiddler on the Roof.”

That tradition has been turned around to mean something un-altered, immovable received from “Fathers”, is a sign of what happened to Christianity in 2nd Millennium European Academia.

Idealism. Legalism. Works.

The loss of a sense of Time, the Time of Creation; of the sanctity of God’s Very Good Creation.

Speaking of Works, we all “know” for a received fact, that Judaism is legalistic and that the Pharisees were Bad. It ain’t true. Judaism never was legalistic, nor were the Pharisees legalistic in our (post 16th century Renaissance) understanding of the word (they certainly were more so than the vast majority in their own day).

The ethos of Judaism is not Merit; Qualification, as per Indo-European Philosophy, but an Accompaniment, something to go with being part.

To break a rule, to transgress, to trespass, is not to “sin” in a 12th century sense.

Judaism does not do Sin.

The LXX word translated as “sin”; amartía is what you do in Long Bows; you step over the line. This makes the arrow miss the mark – it will pass above and beyond!

We fail because we try too much. Not the other way around.

So, whenever you bring out the Good Book: forget “Law” – it’s Tradition.

“The booklet has a number of frequently asked questions for people coming at this subject with no experience, and also explains the political and legal situation, as well as pastoral guidelines for churches."